Today's mass shooting in the US

Status
Not open for further replies.
You think I wouldn't enjoy a society were people don't need to rollover and accept being a victim as a part of life. okay.
that's not how the society you are fantasising about would work.
You are just trying to insult me, so i decided to have some fun with you.
i'm not trying to insult you, it's the extreme idea you're peddling i'm insulting.
 
On the subject of shooting a thief.

Could your conscience really rest easy if you shot someone dead for stealing something as meaningless as a phone? Don't get me wrong, I'd be pretty fuming if I had just got my phone robbed but it's literally of no use to them as it's locked and it'll just be a fancy paperweight.

Shooting someone dead for that is crazy.

This isn't shooing someone because your loved one is in genuine life threatening danger. That I fully understand and I think most people in that moment would do whatever they could to protect a loved one. Just shooting someone dead for stealing my phone? They can have it. I don't need the loss of someone's life on my mind when I want to go to bed.

It's easy to play John Wick in our minds and act like we'd do it and carry on with our day as normal but that's just putting on a show, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
You do appear to be pushing a rather extreme position. This thread is about mass shootings, which I hope we all agree are a bad thing and are clearly a potential problem in a society that embraced gun ownership. The overall dangers of everyone carrying a gun (including the pickpockets and muggers) seem worse than the risk of losing your wallet. No one is saying that you can't take reasonable steps to defend yourself, but it's a big escalation from that to allowing vigilante executions in the street.
Really the discussion should be in a thread of its own. Criminals can already get guns in this country. No idea if it is easy or hard but they already have access to them. The only reason they don't use them is because you are defenseless, so they don't need them.
 
A rare treat for all concerned, I’m sure.

Do you have statistics to back up that statement?

If you make it easy for the general population to get access to guns to defend themselves then you make it even easier for the unsavoury types to also get access to guns to use on the innocent.

Unsavoury types in the USA don't seem to have much difficulty getting firearms.
 
Really the discussion should be in a thread of its own. Criminals can already get guns in this country. No idea if it is easy or hard but they already have access to them. The only reason they don't use them is because you are defenseless, so they don't need them.
This bit really.

But I will add that "carrying guns for self defence" tends not to work out well in real life, as the criminal will have their weapon and ready to use out whilst the "I need a weapon for self defence" person is likely still concentrating on their phone or the ATM with their weapon still in a pocket.
IIRC statistically in America you're far more likely to kill a family member/have a family member killed* with the "self defence" gun than for it to kill an actual criminal.
Even in instances of mass shootings the "good guys" with guns are rarely in place to stop anything quickly, and often add to the confusion which leads to them shooting at each other (or just plain getting killed by the nervous police** who are responding and see someone with a gun and shoot without question).


*So many Americans think that "fast access" to a gun for "self defence" means they shouldn't be required to store it properly, away from their toddlers.

**From memory there was an instance a couple of years back where a security guard at a venue, wearing a "security" marked top was killed by police whilst restraining a shooter, and with the bystanders screaming at the police that he was security.
 
On the subject of shooting a thief.

Could your conscience really rest easy if you shot someone dead for stealing something as meaningless as a phone? Don't get me wrong, I'd be pretty fuming if I had just got my phone robbed but it's literally of no use to them as it's locked and it'll just be a fancy paperweight.

Shooting someone dead for that is crazy.

This isn't shooing someone because your loved one is in genuine life threatening danger. That I fully understand and I think most people in that moment would do whatever they could to protect a loved one. Just shooting someone dead for stealing my phone? They can have it. I don't need the loss of someone's life on my mind when I want to go to bed.

It's easy to play John Wick in our minds and act like we'd do it and carry on with our day as normal but that's just putting on a show, in my opinion.
Interesting moral question. I don't know if i could rest easy doing that. Nobody knows till they are actually in that position. Edit: Sorry I forgot I is an 'ard man right. I would sleep fine bruv. brap brap.

I can see why people think its crazy or excessive but Should we allow criminals to freely wonder the streets stealing what ever they like. Because thats what happening in london now. how much should a criminal steal from you before you say enough is enough?
 
Last edited:
Unsavoury types in the USA don't seem to have much difficulty getting firearms.
That was kind of my point

I feel much safer knowing the population isn't armed to the teeth on their trip to the supermarket.

On the bank holiday weekend there was a house being super obnoxious having a party blasting bloody Elton John out at 1am. I was struggling to get to sleep and was thinking "if I had a gun I'd make that whole house meet their expiry date real quick". Now, obviously I haven't got a gun and I also wouldn't go and delete a family because I'm not a maniac but if guns were accessible and you were already someone on the edge, they could go and remove that family, with ease.

You hear of regular people getting cut up in traffic and road rage tips them over the edge. At least here we just mutter a few words and keep it moving. Having easy access to guns under the guise of self defence can get pretty dangerous for all involved if they skip a moment of rational thought.
 
Could your conscience really rest easy if you shot someone dead for stealing something as meaningless as a phone?

I can only speak for myself but yes. I think you may have a different perspective from me, though. It's not that I don't value a human life more than a phone but the thief values the phone sufficiently valuable to risk their life. The thief chooses their fate.
 
Do you have statistics to back up that statement?



Unsavoury types in the USA don't seem to have much difficulty getting firearms.
Possibly because the rules in many states are so lax you practically have to be a convicted killer to not be able to get one legally from a retail store and there are so many loopholes about buying/selling them that even if you're in a state with some sort of serious laws someone only has to go to the next state over to use a loophole.

Add in things like people not being required to report their guns stolen, or keeping them unlocked in their cars...and the NRA having spent the last 40 years actively making the ATF's job of tracking gun sales almost impossible - they're not (or were not until very recently**) allowed to do any sort of DB with a computer, it's all paper so IF a gun's sale has been registered it can take weeks as a "priority" to find the last legitimate buyer as the ATF literally has to go through thousands of tons of paper records like it's the 1820's, assuming the dealer the gun to is still open or the paperwork has been transfered upon the retailer shutting down..

IIRC the US "legal" gun trade actively supplies a good portion of the weapons used by the mexican cartels.

**They were for decades banned from using a computer DB, and even the use of scanned papers to reduce the need to send agents to search through warehouses of boxes of papers was subject to a legal fight. Yes it's that stupid.
 
Interesting moral question. I don't know if i could rest easy doing that. Nobody knows till they are actually in that position. Edit: Sorry I forgot I is an 'ard man right. I would sleep fine bruv. brap brap.

I can see why people think its crazy or excessive but Should we allow criminals to freely wonder the streets stealing what ever they like. Because thats what happening in london now. how much should a criminal steal from you before you say enough is enough?

For my own values, I wouldn't want to shoot someone dead for stealing my phone. That stuff is replaceable. A £1000 phone loss or a life time thinking that I killed someone? That's an easy choice for me to make. Even if the person who stole my phone/bag is a scumbag, they've still got a mother/father/loved ones who will feel that loss and that's not something I need on my mind.

I'm not saying how I feel about it is the correct course. It's just how I feel about it. I shot a crow with an air rifle when I was 16. I'm now 35 and I still feel bad and ashamed about it.
 
I think any further discussion of self defence/right to carry weapons in the UK probably needs it's own thread, one where it's understood the UK does actually have very robust laws about using self defence to protect youself and others, just not the right to carry a weapon specifically to do so unless you are authorised and trained to do so by the government as a law enforcement officer.
 
Really the discussion should be in a thread of its own. Criminals can already get guns in this country. No idea if it is easy or hard but they already have access to them. The only reason they don't use them is because you are defenseless, so they don't need them.

I dont think that is quite true.

In the UK you might be able to get a gun if you have right connections in the criminal underworld.
Only a fraction of criminals here have those sort of connections in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Americans will do anything—and make any excuse—to avoid addressing their gun problem.

sFcEInp.png


yyhWckn.png
 
Americans will do anything—and make any excuse—to avoid addressing their gun problem.
You've used these previously and they are very generous with their 'facts' (think you must work there tbh), and it's good to see that they are still being generous.

The number of school shootings quoted is drawn from the same k12 database that was in post 6393 (not your fault i suppose, if its good enough for the guardian to mislead folks then its good enough for you right?), and they use a bunch of data that's not relevant to boost the numbers, for shock value i suppose.
How many school shootings this year? Unlike other data sources, this information includes gang shootings, domestic violence, shootings at sports games and afterhours school events, suicides, fights that escalate into shootings, and accidents.

Back to the drawing board for you old boy.
 
You've used these previously and they are very generous with their 'facts' (think you must work there tbh)

Work where, exactly?

The number of school shootings quoted is drawn from the same k12 database that was in post 6393 (not your fault i suppose, if its good enough for the guardian to mislead folks then its good enough for you right?), and they use a bunch of data that's not relevant to boost the numbers, for shock value i suppose.

There's nothing misleading about this data. K-12 is completely transparent about how their figures are calculated; it would be misleading if they weren't, or if they made claims about their data which are not true (which they don't).

Yes, their definition is broad, and they state this openly:

The scope is widely inclusive by documenting every instance in which a gun is fired, brandished (pointed at a person with intent), or a bullet hits school property (including sidewalks, walking paths, athletic fields, and common areas expected to be frequented by students) regardless of the number of victims, time, day of the week, or reason (e.g., planned attack, accidental, domestic violence, gang-related).

I don't see how these are 'irrelevant.' In any case, K-12 allows you to filter the results and specify more narrowly defined metrics, so if you're desperate to massage the figures in an attempt to get the number down, you can do that.

The fact remains that these shootings are typically the result of poor gun policy. That's the elephant in the room, and you're just not addressing it.
 
Last edited:
The reality is much of the US establishment doesn't want to try and solve the problem of mass shootings and gun crime.

The proof is in the repeated thoughts and prayers for decades.

Now if an illegal immigrant kills or assaults someone they are outraged. You should be at violence. No question. But they don't apply that to mass shootings and other gun crime by Americans?

Bonkers.
 
Interesting moral question. I don't know if i could rest easy doing that. Nobody knows till they are actually in that position. Edit: Sorry I forgot I is an 'ard man right. I would sleep fine bruv. brap brap.

I can see why people think its crazy or excessive but Should we allow criminals to freely wonder the streets stealing what ever they like. Because thats what happening in london now. how much should a criminal steal from you before you say enough is enough?

The problem is, this world you've constructed where only a mugger is your problem in life and therefore a gun is a solution is flawed. The idea that a gun is a solution is also flawed and we'll go through each point.

Your solution to muggers, could if you pardon the pun backfire. During an argument your girlfriend/wife could lose her rag, take the gun and shoot you, 'Oh no! The mugger wasn't the only potential hazard'.

Or perhaps you misplaced the gun and your toddler child picked it up and shot your wife/gf or even yourself.

Or maybe you've had a very depressing day, normally suicide would seem difficult, but good for you there is a gun on standbye, that's deadpan sarcasm, I hope no one kills themselves but guns make it easier.

Or perhaps a kind neighbour brings the post around after it was delivered to the wrong address. And because you have this same paranoid outlook to your follow man you see him as a threat and shoot him

Guns in the US hardly ever protect anyone ever, they tend to cause murders that are unnecessary, but let's say even if you did come into a conflict with someone and killed them, are you prepared to be charged with murder, manslaughter and do you think you have fair reason to claim self defence?

Also your idea that criminals don't get guns because they don't need to is obviously flawed too. Because trust me every wanna be gangster is wanting to flash a gun. And your idea that making guns easier to own is going to help law abiding citizens over violent criminals is flawed. Because guess what, do you know who wants to carry a gun, a violent criminal, normies tend to frown on it. And if a violent criminal knows a law abiding citizen might be carrying a gun, he isn't going to threaten him, he'll kill him and then take his possessions.

Essentially more guns equates to more death and destruction no matter who has them.
 
You’re supposed to make a thread if you want to respond or are you just going to blatantly ignore the mods. I considered making a thread about this idea (as well as other thread topics) for a while but I don’t know I just can’t be bothered to make a thread. *shrugs*

I didn't see the mods post, but I think my post highlights everything that could go wrong with people carrying guns, not whether it's a right to do so or not, which @Werewolf was refering to. I will say it's interesting that after arguing for several pages, you don't have any comeback after I pointed out to you everything that could go wrong with your basic premise of carring a deadly weapon, that literally anyone could kill anyone with.

It should be also noted that guns everywhere leads to mass shootings, ie the thread title, which you ignore. After the Dunblane massacre Britain put in gun control. After however million school shootings in America, they are allowing more extreme guns to be made available to every nutcase in America.

But because you're only focused on your fear of bullying criminals, you think that's a good thing that such a system could be in place. We've seen countless gun deaths in America, 100,000s if not millions, and for some, they tap their head and think 'yea that's a good idea bro, the UK is just way too safe'
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom